Intervention in Egypt contrasted
dramatically with recent campaigns in Africa and Afghanistan. It
involved the largest expeditionary force despatched by Britain since the
Crimean War and achieved a decisive outcome in less than two months,
that is, from the passing of a vote of credit by the House of Commons
for an expeditionary force (27 July 1882) to the crushing victory at

of 1878.
As a reflection of fault lines in British society, though, these demonstrations were not exclusively pro-Bulgarian: by late 1877 and early 1878, many Britons had begun calling for intervention on the side of the Ottomans against the Russians, who had invaded the Ottoman Empire in 1877 (using the massacres as an excuse). This faction marched to the Russophobic, pro-war, imperialist song ‘By Jingo!’ (and even, at times, raised the Ottoman flag during their demonstrations).
15
Still, the

The intellectual influence of non-medical research on policy and practice in the Colonial Medical Service in Tanganyika and Uganda

Shane Doyle

technological mastery of the imperial scientist,
and praised the power of the colonial state to transform communities,
legitimised and facilitated by medical expertise. 1 These assertions and ambitions,
however, were not always realised. Medical interventions were frequently
shaped by racial or political rather than objective, scientific
motivations, and their consequences could be destabilising rather than

imperial and humanitarian intervention as well as the contemporary context of decolonisation. From the humanitarian ‘discovery’ of hunger in the late nineteenth century to the Colonial Welfare and Development Act of 1940, imperial Britain played a central role in describing the modern meaning of hunger and determining the systems for redressing it. 7 It was in Britain, James Vernon argues, that hunger first came to be acknowledged as an imperial and later a global problem, and, concomitantly, where political movements and forms of statecraft developed to combat it

trigger for this conflict? Was it Lin Zexu's campaign to stamp out the opium trade, or Charles Elliot's ‘heroic’ intervention in the opium crisis, or the murder of Lin Weixi, a Chinese villager who was allegedly killed by a British seaman? A war in defence of a contraband trade, of course, sounds morally unjustifiable, but then why should MP George Palmer claim, in the parliamentary debate held in April 1840, that ‘no member was willing to declare himself directly opposed to a war with China’?
1
If this was the case

(all the more challenging because of immigration from China and elsewhere) – and as other European powers, including Germany, began to express an interest in the region – the incentives for greater intervention grew.
These developments took place in the 1870s, however, and it was only in the following decades that the pace of European colonial competition and expansion into Asia and Africa accelerated. The Pangkor Engagement provided only for the appointment of a British adviser (Resident); and it also left ‘Malay Religion and Custom’ in the hands of the Sultan

seen to be out of step with modern Britain, intervention in the name of ‘great powerdom’ was not. 5 What this book shows is that, at least within this middle-class associational sphere, members of the British public imagined themselves as key actors in this national story. The public have always occupied an important position in discourses about the preservation of British imperial influence and identity – as settlers, traders, missionaries, administrators, and promotors of the ‘civilising mission’. 6 As the limitations of the British state's global authority

constructed as a medical intervention in
its own right. Take, for example, the case of M.O., a
nineteen-year-old Nigerian admitted to Saxondale Hospital in Nottingham
with schizophrenia who applied for repatriation in 1950. The hospital
staff supported the repatriation on the grounds that ‘the boy is
unlikely to make a full recovery until he gets home’. 27 Similarly, G.N., a
twenty-six-year-old patient

perverse. The capitalist is a shameless businessman whose nationalism is built exclusively on his business sense. This criticism was directed against all forms of imperialism, both German and non-German. Thus Rata Langa (‘Galantara’) attacked the British during the Boer War, showing John Bull feeding his plant, whose flowers are gilded with the blood of the Boers ( Figure 12.2 ).
6
This same Rata Langa – the key cartoonist at the turn of the century – presented the European intervention in China in this same period in a

not only had a clear impact on the operational decisions made by Christian Aid, it also affected how the organisation sought to demonstrate the importance of its work to the British public.
The death of Christian missions and the rise of imperial critiques
Christian Aid may have started life as a relief agency in war-ravaged Europe, but it was also keen to lay claim to a much longer history of religious international intervention. This had important implications for how supporters conceptualised their relationship to the